What Mourning Malala Yousafzai Might Mean come November 6th.

October 22, 2012
By

By Kim Tran

University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust/AP Photo

Malala Yousafzai’s shooting galvanized the world, sending tens of thousands of Pakistanis to protest in the streets of Karachi last Sunday.  The Taliban’s open vendetta and eventual near-fatal shooting of the 14-year old education crusader has highlighted education for women across the country while also underscoring the brutality of the Taliban.  While I claim no particular expertise in matters of foreign policy, it is imperative to consider a few unexplored variables in the oversimplified portrayal of one young woman’s struggle for her rights.

I find the violence perpetrated against Malala Yousafzai reprehensible in every way.  As a result, I want to consider how her young body became both the site where the Taliban chose to enact physical warfare and also ideological justification for the very thing it rejects: an American presence in Pakistan.  Put simply, how is the attack against Malala Yousafzai being used to legitimize American imperialism?  In an election year, mourning Malala Yousafzai and celebrating her bravery should cause us as American voters to examine how women are appropriated time and time again in war rhetoric.

As political actors, we must recognize how women’s rights are consistently utilized as justification for U.S. militarism.  Democratic Senate nominee Cynthia Dill from Maine is a prime example of this correlation.  Three days ago, Dill wrote an op-ed in the Huffington Post exuberantly thanking the Obama Administration for “the presence of U.S. troops and allies in Afghanistan” to whom she attributed women’s “growth” and “flourishing of individual freedoms.”  Importantly, Dill’s exaggerated support for the Obama Administration made no connections to the President’s expansion of war efforts in the Middle East.

Since January 2009, over 300 drone attacks have been carried out in Pakistan.  That’s six times the number undertaken by the President’s predecessor, the infamous “war-mongering” President Bush.  Drone attacks are incredibly unpopular in Pakistan. Two weeks ago, politician Imran Khan drew thousands when he led a protest against drone warfare in the tribal region of Pakistan.

Moreover, a recent study done by NYU and Stanford researchers found that drone attacks “terrorize men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities.” The attacks have caused between 400-800 civilian casualties since 2004. Moreover, the study shows that only 2 percent of drone attack victims are said to be top militant leaders. Arguments for Pakistani sovereignty aside, the psychological consequences, loss of civilian lives, and widespread unpopularity of drone attacks needs to be taken in conjunction with the Taliban’s ideological goal of expelling “Western culture” and the rhetoric of women’s liberation.

I strongly condemn the Taliban’s tactics of brutality.  However, I also refuse to condone the American perpetration of needless deaths in Pakistan.  Both Taliban war methods and American imperialism understand what women do, their day-to-day actions, as symbolic of political ideology.  Thus, women’s bodies become extremely important venues for regulation and violence.

In this instance, to fulfill their agenda of “bring[ing] down the West and the United States” the Pakistani sect of the Taliban attempted to kill Malala Yousafzai. However, in so doing they created a cause célèbre who could be taken up in American political discourse to illustrate the necessity of imperialism and militarism.  In both instances, the demonization of the “West” and “East” rely exclusively on using women as little more than disempowered symbols of political ideology.  Further, although women’s bodies are co-opted by both movements, it is important to note that the Democratic Party purports to simultaneously safeguard women’s rights while broadening drone warfare policies that systematically destroy and terrorize communities.  Ultimately, we must heed the ways in which women’s bodies are used as fodder to satisfy political aims.

It is undeniable that innumerable girls are coerced into marriage and face economic obstacles to education. There is more, however, to take into account when contemplating efforts of U.S. militarism.  I urge us all to consider how we as a country have allowed the conversation around schooling for girls like Malala Yousafzai to progress without a discussion of how their stories are used to justify the countless deaths of people across the globe.

____________________________________________________________

Kim Tran is a graduate student in the Ethnic Studies program at the University of California, Berkeley.  Her work examines refugee communities, transnational labor, gender, and queer studies.  She is originally from San Jose, California, a proud survivor of California’s public schools and universities who aspires to think alongside young people in classrooms and community.

Tags: ,

8 Responses to What Mourning Malala Yousafzai Might Mean come November 6th.

  1. David Morgan on October 24, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    I applaud your observations Kim. As Rom Emanuel once said (admittedly in a different context)power brokers are loathe to “waste a crisis.” This young woman’s story is of the sort which is generally found to be irresistable by those who wish to lend their pet agenda’s an air of legitimacy. When I encounter this sort of thing in my activist/personal life, I am likely to repond by directly admonishing my would-be ally “Please…don’t be on my side.” “I am having enough trouble as it is.”

  2. David Morgan on October 24, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    I applaud your observations Kim. As Rom Emanuel once said (admittedly in a different context)power brokers are loathe to “waste a crisis.” This young woman’s story is of the sort which is generally found to be irresistable by those who wish to lend their pet agenda’s an air of legitimacy. When I encounter this sort of thing in my activist/personal life, I am likely to repond by directly admonishing my would-be ally “Please…don’t be on my side.” “I am having enough trouble as it is.”

  3. David Morgan on October 24, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    I applaud your observations Kim. As Rom Emanuel once said (admittedly in a different context)power brokers are loathe to “waste a crisis.” This young woman’s story is of the sort which is generally found to be irresistable by those who wish to lend their pet agenda’s an air of legitimacy. When I encounter this sort of thing in my activist/personal life, I am likely to repond by directly admonishing my would-be ally “Please…don’t be on my side.” “I am having enough trouble as it is.”

  4. David Morgan on October 24, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    I applaud your observations Kim. As Rom Emanuel once said (admittedly in a different context)power brokers are loathe to “waste a crisis.” This young woman’s story is of the sort which is generally found to be irresistable by those who wish to lend their pet agenda’s an air of legitimacy. When I encounter this sort of thing in my activist/personal life, I am likely to repond by directly admonishing my would-be ally “Please…don’t be on my side.” “I am having enough trouble as it is.”

  5. mary on November 10, 2012 at 10:00 am

    You mean you didn’t notice how westerners are attracted to Malala’s victimhood? That they only noticed her because she became powerless, allowing the men in the white hats to rescue her? You didn’t understand how Malala’s shooting was a way to reinforce patriarchy worldwide, by showing that (Pakistani women) are in need of rescue?

  6. mary on November 10, 2012 at 10:00 am

    You mean you didn’t notice how westerners are attracted to Malala’s victimhood? That they only noticed her because she became powerless, allowing the men in the white hats to rescue her? You didn’t understand how Malala’s shooting was a way to reinforce patriarchy worldwide, by showing that (Pakistani women) are in need of rescue?

  7. mary on November 10, 2012 at 10:00 am

    You mean you didn’t notice how westerners are attracted to Malala’s victimhood? That they only noticed her because she became powerless, allowing the men in the white hats to rescue her? You didn’t understand how Malala’s shooting was a way to reinforce patriarchy worldwide, by showing that (Pakistani women) are in need of rescue?

  8. mary on November 10, 2012 at 10:00 am

    You mean you didn’t notice how westerners are attracted to Malala’s victimhood? That they only noticed her because she became powerless, allowing the men in the white hats to rescue her? You didn’t understand how Malala’s shooting was a way to reinforce patriarchy worldwide, by showing that (Pakistani women) are in need of rescue?

Follow The Feminist Wire

Arts & Culture

  • Remembering and Honoring Toni Cade Bambara Sanchez

    Sonia Sanchez: What are we pretending not to know today? The premise as you said, my sister, being that colored people on planet earth really know everything there is to know. And if one is not coming to grips with the knowledge, it must mean that one is either scared or pretending to be stupid.

  • Hunger Kwame Laughing Foto

    They say you had the eye; they say you saw
    into people. They say you came before as shaman
    or bruja and returned as priestess; they say you were
    stonebreaker. But for me, you were a big sister
    feeling for a lonely brother with no language
    to lament, and you gave me more days, and
    more days. Yes, they could have called you
    Grace, Bambara; they could have called you that.

  • Stroller (A Screenplay) Black families and community

    Roxana Walker-Canton: Natalie sits in her own seat in front of her mother and looks out the window. Mostly WHITE PEOPLE get on and off the bus now. The bus rides through a neighborhood of single family homes. A BLACK WOMAN with TWO WHITE CHILDREN get on the bus. Natalie stares at the children.

Princeton University Post Doc: Apply Now!